And it has Matt Hasselbeck and Jason Campbell ahead of Brady. Really, how much credit can anyone give to this? It was supposed to dethrone passer rating whilst inserting a system that accurately calculated the value of a QB in a given game, but...Jesus...

If you look at the overall season leaders Tom is number 1. I'd give it a bit more time before dismissing it. Sometimes individual weeks will produce strange results. What matters more is the overall. That is what will tell you if a stat is truly meaningful or not.

If you look at the overall season leaders Tom is number 1. I'd give it a bit more time before dismissing it. Sometimes individual weeks will produce strange results. What matters more is the overall. That is what will tell you if a stat is truly meaningful or not.

Click to expand...

TQBR sucks because it fails exactly at what it intends to get right: evaluate a QB's contribution to the team's performance. By inserting a series of seemingly random subjective elements in its formula, and attributing different weights to each element in its calculation, the end result is, often times, just a mess.

It simply gives too much credit to QB's that are constantly trailing, or playing in close games, while undervaluing guys who build early leads and cruise from there.

TQBR, in my opinion, will never be an accurate assessor of a QB. you simply cannot have a subjective component to a statistic.

Click to expand...

I don't like it either, but FWIW:

Q. Is it subjective?

A. There is a perception, mainly from people who watched the QBR special, that QBR has a lot of subjective components. Some who watched the show thought that the expected points were allocated subjectively by people watching games -- give this guy a point or take away a point. This is not true and something we need to clear up.

What underlies QBR is expected points and win probability. In determining expected points and win probability as they relate to field position, down, and distance, there is no subjectivity other than slight differences in how these models are built (which is why AdvancedNFLstats.com doesn't have exactly the same numbers we have). These differences are definitely small.

The part of QBR that could be cynically called "subjective" is that there are judgment calls with regard to what are dropped passes vs overthrows or underthrows or defended passes. ESPN's video trackers have strict guidelines on how to chart these items so that they are consistent across the different people doing charting. If you as a fan go out and chart these yourself for a game or two, you will see how several calls are easy, but some are quite hard to judge. We have standards that make things more uniform and every game is done twice to reconcile inconsistencies. Despite the standards, the gray areas will still exist and, because they exist, the division of credit quantitative analysis described below is important. That analysis is what says that a "drop" isn't necessarily all about a receiver because there are gray areas in drops.

Notably, the kind of judgment calls here are not unique. Every week, statistics like hurries, tackles, or targets get used but have similar judgment necessary to decide them. Neither of these are official NFL statistics and both come with clear gray area. Coaches are known to spend hours going back to evaluate credit on various plays. Our hope is that any statistics used to evaluate individuals in football come with analysis to help split the credit in these more gray areas. We did that analysis to limit subjectivity.

And it has Matt Hasselbeck and Jason Campbell ahead of Brady. Really, how much credit can anyone give to this? It was supposed to dethrone passer rating whilst inserting a system that accurately calculated the value of a QB in a given game, but...Jesus...

Click to expand...

This sux more than the existing QB rating system, too subjective and the categories are confusing.. epic fail.

The current NFL Passer rating system has Brady, Rodgers, Brees and Stafford which is probably more accurate than the other system..

If you look at the overall season leaders Tom is number 1. I'd give it a bit more time before dismissing it. Sometimes individual weeks will produce strange results. What matters more is the overall. That is what will tell you if a stat is truly meaningful or not.

Click to expand...

The point of the new system is that it's supposed to eliminate strange results. If it's not doing that, it's not doing its job.

The point of the new system is that it's supposed to eliminate strange results. If it's not doing that, it's not doing its job.

As complicated as it is, if it's not doing its job, what good is it?

Click to expand...

Like all statistics, it is just another data point. There is never any one tell all statistic especially in a team sport like football. Personally, I like the job Football Outsiders does, but I don't take any one statistic as gospel.

Like all statistics, it is just another data point. There is never any one tell all statistic especially in a team sport like football. Personally, I like the job Football Outsiders does, but I don't take any one statistic as gospel.

Click to expand...

I understand, but ESPN is touting it as something it's not. That's as bad as what PFF does, but it's got the power of the worldwide leader behind it, which makes it more problematic.

They should either take a page from advanced baseball metrics that attempt to normalize things like ballpark and defense or just treat every incomplete pass the same.

You can't have a subjective component (no matter how great they think their system is). I can easily call the dropped pass component subjective without feeling cynical at all. Having it judged by humans is the very definition of subjective. As soon as someone has to interpret what has happened it is no longer objective.

And every game is done twice to reconcile inconsistencies? Twice? I understand that by the very nature of football, all eleven players contributing in some way to every play, it makes it hard to quantify an individual's contribution.

So if you can't do it just say you can't do it and spare me the crap masquerading as statistical analysis because it is embarrassing.